Light aircraft crash Leigh Creek
wouldn't surprise me if he didn't have full fuel out of WMC due cost of it there. I have been to both WMC and LCK many times and the latter is substantially cheaper than the former. About a year ago was $3 odd / lt so wouldn't be any cheaper now. Plus limited supplies at times out there too. Common practice to just tske enough plus reserves to get to next refuelling point.
The frustrating thing I found last year flying from Carrapateena over to Leigh Ck in the dark was that the PAALC does not give a confirmation response upon activation. Common problem with the older units and something I asked to be raised st the MOS139 review. The only clue I had that the lights were activated before my arrival was the white beacon which I could see from about 30nm.
gives weight to the argument of having a responsible person on the ground to manually turn the lights on.
gives weight to the argument of having a responsible person on the ground to manually turn the lights on.
wouldn't surprise me if he didn't have full fuel out of WMC due cost of it there. I have been to both WMC and LCK many times and the latter is substantially cheaper than the former. About a year ago was $3 odd / lt so wouldn't be any cheaper now. Plus limited supplies at times out there too. Common practice to just tske enough plus reserves to get to next refuelling point.
Thread Starter
Thread Starter
The frustrating thing I found last year flying from Carrapateena over to Leigh Ck in the dark was that the PAALC does not give a confirmation response upon activation. Common problem with the older units and something I asked to be raised st the MOS139 review. The only clue I had that the lights were activated before my arrival was the white beacon which I could see from about 30nm.
gives weight to the argument of having a responsible person on the ground to manually turn the lights on.
gives weight to the argument of having a responsible person on the ground to manually turn the lights on.
DF.
Thread Starter
Just watched a segment on the Today Show about the crash, & they're putting the time at 6:20PM. That pretty much ties in with the pager message I got at 6:27PM because I hadn't long got back inside before it went off.
DF.
DF.
So, based on what my identical Brumby 610 requires, you could then fit 60 kgs of fuel into it = 80L. Divide this by an average burn of 18LPH for a 90-95 KTAS cruise, and you should have an endurance of 270 mins ex William Creek. For a distance of 148nm, based on an average cruise of 90 kts, the required cruise time is 1:39 for a fuel consumption of 30L. In the prevailing 'westerley' wx, a Brumby 610 was more likely to achieve 100+ on that track. By my calcs, there could have been as much as 50L in the tanks - always provided that they left William Creek with a max allowable fuel load.
It's likely there are many lessons to be re-learned from this accident. I hope that RAAus determine all immediately relevant factors, and informs the pilot community as soon as they are able.
RAAus seem to have the mindset that they know what is important to learn from an accident and only disclose that, if they say anything at all...
RAAus don’t have the legislative powers, unlimited government funds or the staff to provide full analysis of the incidents. They also don’t have the protection from the act around information disclosure. They assist the police with the investigation.. have you ever tried to get information from the police about car crashes and what caused them??
They would if they could, but the simple fact remains that they can’t.
Pilots make mistakes, they are only human. In this case, prevention and improved training may have been the better course of action rather than injecting valuable funds into crash analysis.
Nobody has come up with a new way to crash an aircraft in the last 50 years, so we know what causes crashes; it’s just a matter of educating pilots into making better planning and operational decisions.
It is all well and good to say that "this could have happened to a GA pilot" and yes, you are correct, it could have. It didn't. But after that idiot left Temora for Coota in a trike after last light, we have another apparently similar prang in relatively quick succession. Beyond the bloke in the R44 up north that made the ATSB reports, I'm not aware of any similar GA accidents recently. Given the relative proportion of RAAus to GA one can only wonder why that is?
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EVERY single plane crash is human error in one form or another, do we learn from each one? Nope, that's the saddest part:-(
I've always said it's too easy to get a pilots certificate in any of it's forms, we pay for that 'easy' access but it's still a personnel choice to push the envelope!
I feel bad for the innocent women here, she had zero control over her life once they left the ground:-) RIP. As for the pilot? we will never know sadly:-(
I've always said it's too easy to get a pilots certificate in any of it's forms, we pay for that 'easy' access but it's still a personnel choice to push the envelope!
I feel bad for the innocent women here, she had zero control over her life once they left the ground:-) RIP. As for the pilot? we will never know sadly:-(
You would need to account for levels of activity before anyone can make comparisons of GA and RAA accident rates.
Then there is the question of certified vs. uncertified aircraft.
Deal with those before making wild statements about the RAA.
Then there is the question of the Aristocratic principle. It is easier for a complete idiot to buy a trike - by definition the idiot can’t make enough money to buy a Bonanza. So what do you expect to have the higher accident rate? Unfortunately I have recent tragic experience of this in action.
A corollary to that is that if you make flying expensive enough, there will be fewer accidents of any sort.
I fail to see any factual base to statements like “GA is safer”, etc. etc.
I don’t think RAA pilots value their lives any less than GA pilots and I cannot think of any training difference that would automatically result in a higher accident rate. As Squawk implied , the basics are pretty simple.
To put that another way, I do not consider my training as a GA pilot makes me somehow safer than a similarly motivated RAA pilot.
Then there is the question of certified vs. uncertified aircraft.
Deal with those before making wild statements about the RAA.
Then there is the question of the Aristocratic principle. It is easier for a complete idiot to buy a trike - by definition the idiot can’t make enough money to buy a Bonanza. So what do you expect to have the higher accident rate? Unfortunately I have recent tragic experience of this in action.
A corollary to that is that if you make flying expensive enough, there will be fewer accidents of any sort.
I fail to see any factual base to statements like “GA is safer”, etc. etc.
I don’t think RAA pilots value their lives any less than GA pilots and I cannot think of any training difference that would automatically result in a higher accident rate. As Squawk implied , the basics are pretty simple.
To put that another way, I do not consider my training as a GA pilot makes me somehow safer than a similarly motivated RAA pilot.
Only partially correct...Yes, an indirect swipe at RAAus management, but...If RAAus were more concerned with their members wellbeing, instead of selling their details, RAAus would put more emphasis into accident mitigation, even if only using overseas reports as an example. Excerpts from AC43.13 in Sport Pilot, synopses from overseas accidents, 'Rulebook review' column-inches on a regular basis, and we might - and I stress might - not have what appears to be another RAAus pilot, in another RAAus registered aircraft spearing in after last light.
It is all well and good to say that "this could have happened to a GA pilot" and yes, you are correct, it could have. It didn't. But after that idiot left Temora for Coota in a trike after last light, we have another apparently similar prang in relatively quick succession. Beyond the bloke in the R44 up north that made the ATSB reports, I'm not aware of any similar GA accidents recently.
It is all well and good to say that "this could have happened to a GA pilot" and yes, you are correct, it could have. It didn't. But after that idiot left Temora for Coota in a trike after last light, we have another apparently similar prang in relatively quick succession. Beyond the bloke in the R44 up north that made the ATSB reports, I'm not aware of any similar GA accidents recently.
But after that idiot left Temora for Coota in a trike after last light, we have another apparently similar prang in relatively quick succession.
Given the relative proportion of RAAus to GA one can only wonder why that is?
Last edited by Squawk7700; 8th Jul 2019 at 07:01.
Thread Starter
wouldn't surprise me if he didn't have full fuel out of WMC due cost of it there. I have been to both WMC and LCK many times and the latter is substantially cheaper than the former. About a year ago was $3 odd / lt so wouldn't be any cheaper now. Plus limited supplies at times out there too. Common practice to just tske enough plus reserves to get to next refuelling point.
DF.
Last edited by Desert Flower; 8th Jul 2019 at 10:38. Reason: Change info regarding fuel at YMRE.
The aircraft is pictured in here complete with photo of the dash on page 36. Looks to have a Dynon or similar.
https://issuu.com/raaus/docs/sportpi...final_web/1?ff
https://issuu.com/raaus/docs/sportpi...final_web/1?ff
I only fly GA aircraft so don't know much about RAA type other than look at a few. From what I can see from that booklet the Brumby does not appear to have a landing light. Also does it have 2 tanks or just 1 behind the seats like some of them. Reason I ask is if just 1 the pilot would not have known he was fuel critical until it was all over given that aircraft fuel guages are usually unreliable. If no landing light to go with that what chance would he have had out in the bush on a dark night to force land? None I would suggest.